Federal
Judge Expresses Concern About Death Penalty
By
ADAM LIPTAK
A
federal judge in Boston voiced alarm today that imposing the death
penalty "will inevitably result in the execution of innocent
people." But he declined to rule that that the death penalty is
unconstitutional.
"In
the past decade," the judge, Mark L. Wolf, wrote, "substantial
evidence has emerged to demonstrate that innocent individuals are
sentenced to death, and undoubtedly executed, much more often that
previously understood."
He
cited the exonerations of more than 100 people on death row based on
DNA and other evidence.
"The
day may come," Judge Wolf continued, "when a court properly
can and should declare the ultimate sanction to be unconstitutional in
all cases. However, that day has not yet come."
That
means the case against Gary Lee Sampson, including the capital charges,
will now to trial in September. Mr. Sampson has acknowledged
responsibility for three murders. In the space of a few days in 2001,
he killed three men who had picked him up hitchhiking.
Judge
Wolf, a former federal prosecutor and Justice Department official, was
appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan. He appeared
critical of recent changes in the Justice Department's practices in
seeking the death penalty.
"Juries
have recently been regularly disagreeing with the attorney general's
contention that the death penalty is justified in the most egregious
federal cases involving murder," he wrote.
In
16 of the last 17 federal capital prosecutions, Judge Wolf wrote,
juries rejected the death penalty. One of Mr. Sampson's lawyers, David
A. Ruhnke, said Judge Wolf's numbers are outdated. He said the count
now stands at 19 acquittals or life verdicts in the last 20 cases.
The
most recent acquittals came earlier this month in Puerto Rico. Like
Massachusetts, Puerto Rico does not have the death penalty.
Thirty-eight states do.
"These
recent verdicts," Judge Wolf wrote, "raise the question of
whether the Department of Justice is properly employing its stated
standards in deciding to seek the death penalty."
The
acquittals and life sentences are evidence, Judge Wolf continued, of
an evolving societal consensus against the death penalty that courts
may take account of in deciding whether capital punishment violates
the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
"If
juries continue to reject the death penalty in the most egregious
federal cases," he wrote, "the courts will have significant
objective evidence that the ultimate sanction is not compatible with
contemporary standards of decency."
He
also noted that the department's policies about whether to take into
account local opposition to the death penalty have changed. Until
2001, the policies said that the absence of a local death penalty did
not by itself justify a federal capital prosecution. That has changed.
"It
appears," Judge Wolf wrote, "that the fact that a state's
laws do not authorize capital punishment may now alone be deemed
sufficient to justify a federal death penalty prosecution."
A
Justice Department spokeswoman did not immediately return calls
seeking comment.
Only
one federal jury has sentenced a defendant to death in a jurisdiction
that does not have its own death penalty since the federal death
penalty was reinstated in 1988. That was in Michigan in 2002.
The
only other judge to hear a federal death penalty prosecution in
Massachusetts in recent years later described what he had learned in
The Boston Globe.
"The
experience," Judge Michael Ponsor wrote, "left me with one
unavoidable conclusion: that a legal regime relying on the death
penalty will inevitably execute innocent people � not too often, one
hopes, but undoubtedly sometimes."
|